Beautiful Universe Section 1.merged

10/23/22, 8:20 AM Beautiful Universe Section 1
BEAUTIFUL UNIVERSE:
TOWARDS RECONSTRUCTING PHYSICS
HOME FROM NEW FIRST PRINCIPLES
PHYSICS
& MATHS By Vladimir F. Tamari
BEATIFUL 4-2-8-C26 Komazawa, Setagaya-ku, Tokyo Japan 154-0012

UNIVERSE
SECTIONS: vladimirtamari@hotmail.com
(First published on this website and circulated by email from 10 July 2005. Material
1 related to the Compton Effect and Dark Energy in sections 2.6 and 2.11 was added in
1.6 November 2010)
2
2.9 ABSTRACT
A proposal to reconstruct physics from simple physically realistic first principles

is outlined using a Beautiful Universe model. Only one type of ‘building block' is used: a
spherically-symmetrical charged node spinning with angular momentum in units of
Planck’s constant (h). Rotating nodes become magnetized and self-assemble as a
regular face-centered cubic lattice to form the vacuum, radiation and matter. Non-
spinning nodes make up dark matter. Three space and one time dimension are derived
from the lattice and node interactions. Mutual repulsion between nodes making up the
vacuum accounts for the expansion of the universe and for the pressure of 'dark
matter'. A spinning node transfers its angular momentum to adjacent nodes by rotating
on an orthogonal axis, thus creating an electromagnetic field with forward momentum.
The spin rate of the node receiving the momentum, its ‘density’ determines the rate cv
at which it receives the radiation. In a vacuum cv is the maximum, c0 the velocity of
light. Two or more adjacent nodes locked together through a tensegrity of attractive (+
-) and repulsive electrostatic forces form as matter. The surrounding nodes orient their
axes to form magnetic, gravitational or electrostatic fields. The inverse-square law and
E=mc0^2 are derived from the resulting geometry. Motion of matter is a self-
convolution of an energy pattern in the lattice. This links the concepts of Newtonian
force and mass with in units of h, whereby a collision causes a Heaviside contraction of
an object’s length. Doppler shifts in the signals used by an outside observer to measure
the moving object causes a further contraction in the estimated length, similar to the
effects of a time dilation. The two effects explain a result of Special Relativity in
classical terms. Using the Hamiltonian Analogy and the idea of a node index of
refraction n=co/cv General Relativity is reduced to the dynamics of energy transport
along streamlines made up of nodes of different spin. Variable velocity along curved
streamlines is acceleration and hence gravity. Quantum probability is derived from the
electric field of a dipole wave in the lattice. Heisenberg’s uncertainty relations emerge
naturally from the resulting geometry. Cosmological inflation, but not a Big-Bang
singularity would result from initial conditions of nodes in their closest proximity to each
other. The outline of a discrete calculus needed to describe the model’s interactions is
presented. Some experiments are proposed to test various aspects of the model.
Key words: Physical Theory. Theory of everything. TOE . Special Relativity, General
Relativity. Node. Lattice. Quantum Mechanics. Uncertainty relations. Discrete Calculus.
Ether, Heaviside. Planck’s Constant. EPR. Expanding Universe. Inflation. Anomaly.
1. THE BEAUTIFUL UNIVERSE (BU)

MODEL
1.1 THE NEED FOR REALISTIC THEORIES CLOSE TO NATURE
Nature is now complex, but is believed to have evolved systematically over

billions of years, following simple processes. This is the lesson of the theories of
evolution[1], of fractal equations[2], cross-stitch embroidery[3], digital philosophy[4],
and of Wolfram’s book A New Kind of Science[5]: A very simple effect, principle, rule or
algorithm applied repeatedly leads to a very rich and complicated outcome. In their
efforts to discover the laws of nature, however, philosophers and physicists in different
eras and belonging to different cultures were guided not only by their own thoughts and
chance discoveries, but also by the intellectual baggage of their time: the accumulated
knowledge , preconceived ideas, and even theological concepts.
It is no wonder then that present-day physics is a hodge-podge of complicated

ideas that do not always work well together, if at all. For example the theory describing
gravity on a large scale, General Relativity (GR)[6] and the theory describing atomic
and nuclear processes, Quantum Mechanics (QM)[7], speak different ‘languages’
describing what in the end must be the same phenomena. Moreover both (GR) and
(QM), although extremely successful in predicting experimental results, both use non-
intuitive ideas that seem far from reality. As with the preceding classical physics of
Galileo and Newton, these theories describe the behavior of space, mass, time, or
gravitation, but give no inkling of what these entities are. A lack of a self-consistent
physical model of nature at its most basic level has allowed physicists to accept almost
without question some of the more bizarre conclusions of (QM) such as instantaneous
interaction at cosmic distances. This contradicts a basic premise of Special Relativity
(SR)[8] that signals cannot travel faster than the speed of light.
Such confusion is possible because vastly different mathematical models to

describe the same physical phenomena can be derived: even within (QM) itself,
Schrödinger’s wave equation[9] was found to be exactly equivalent to a very different
mathematical model, Heisenberg’s matrices[10]. But if a model is not ‘true to nature’
its very success distracts from other possibilities, blocking further progress. That
happened with Ptolemy’s concept of the Earth staying still while the Sun and the planets
rotated around it in complicated circular epicycles[11]. The system ‘worked’ even
succeeding in predicting eclipses, because relative to an observer on Earth that is how
vladimirtamari.com/bu1.html 1/8
the planets seemed to move. However it was not until Copernicus[12] put the Sun at
the center that Kepler[13] could discover the much simpler elliptical orbits for the
planets, paving the way for Newton’s law of gravitation[14] and modern physics.
Similarly, although the concept of flexible spacetime ‘works’ in (SR) and (GR),
and that of probability waves ‘works’ in (QM), they are just mathematical ideas that
must be discarded if better models closer to nature can be found. This is more than just
HOME a way to seek more elegant theories: understanding nature at its own level is a
PHYSICS necessary step to pave the way for further theoretical, experimental and technological
& MATHS discoveries. The human brain evolved over millions of years in organisms that
BEATIFUL interacted directly, causally and locally with inanimate nature on a molecular scale[15].
UNIVERSE Is it too much to ask now that our understanding of Mother Nature should also be as
SECTIONS: simple, direct and realistic as possible?
1.2 A NEW START

1
1.6 There is a widely recognized need to ‘start all over’[16], using the hard-won
2 results of 20th Century physics, but reconstructing them out of a few basic self-
2.9 consistent premises.
In the last few decades a great number of papers and books introduced new
starting points at various levels of sophistication and completeness: Twistor
Theory[17], various theories based on an ether particle[18], Quantum Gravity[19] and
many others. String Theory[21] represents such a new start but it creates even more
complications with ten or more dimensions using new mathematics, making the theory
unlikely to be true to nature in the sense discussed above.
The ideas behind Beautiful Universe (BU), the model presented here, derived
from my discovery that a classical dipole’s electromagnetic potential field and its
streamlines form a miniature united field from which can be derived many of the known
phenomena of (SR), (GR), and (QM)[22]. (BU) theory describes a whole universe
made up of charged particles spinning as dipoles, (including regions of dark matter
where the particles have no spin). In the following sections, the (BU) model will be
presented from first principles. In Section 2 an attempt will be made to show that the
experimental results, but not the assumptions or all the methods of Newtonian physics,
(SR), (GR) and (QM) and related cosmological theories may eventually be derived
simply and directly from (BU). In Section 3 experiments that may prove the
correctness of the (BU) approach are proposed. The (BU) presented here is incomplete,
and the treatment is qualitative and elementary. The aim is to gain a sure physical
understanding of the proposed model’s basic concepts, leaving to future work the
necessary but more abstract task of describing it systematically, quantitatively and
mathematically.
1.3 A NETWORK OF CHARGED NODES CREATES SPACE AND TIME
It is hypothesized that the entire universe is made up of an ordered lattice of

identical spherically-symmetric charged nodes that are smaller than the smallest known
nuclear particle, but are on a similar scale to it. This network of nodes creates space
itself, so it is meaningless to speak of the shape of an individual node, neither of the
material it is made of, or its behavior nor of any space between nodes. Nevertheless to
facilitate our understanding, a node can be thought of as being spherical, capable of
spinning freely in place around any axis passing through its center. Either at
cosmological initial conditions or during the universe’s later development, volumes of
nodes rotate and interact with other volumes rotating in an opposite direction (FIG. 1).
This cosmic angular momentum is acquired by individual nodes, and can be

transmitted to neighboring nodes without friction, but will never disappear, conserving
angular momentum locally and in the universe as a whole. Again, we can use the terms
of classical physics here only as an analogy, but having like charge, the nodes repulse
each other and create an expanding universal space. It is theorized that individual
nodes all over the universe spin in the same direction around their own axis.
FIG. 1. An imagined scenario for

the creation of spin in nodes. (a)
Two volumes of charged particles
impinge on each other, as each
volume rotates in the opposite
directions. Their interaction
causes individual nodes to
acquire spin.(b) The resulting
volume of spinning magnetized
nodes self-assemble to creates
an expanding space. There is also
the possibility that the nodes
exist within other undetected
dimensions D (dashed outline).
Spin plays a central role in (BU) and both the physical situation and the terms used
should be clear. There is first the ‘rotation’ of vast volumes of nodes without the
individual nodes spinning on their axis (FIG. 1). A dark-matter node is one without spin
(FIG. 2a).
FIG. 2 the three possible states of nodes (a) basic charged node. (b) Spinning
around one axis, with angular momentum in units of Planck’s constant h. (c)
Spinning around two axes creates forward momentum (large arrows).
HOME
PHYSICS
& MATHS
BEATIFUL ‘Spin’ is when an individual node rotates around its axis so that it becomes a
UNIVERSE magnetic dipole (FIG. 2 b) with angular momentum in units of (h) without affecting
SECTIONS: adjacent nodes. ‘Forward momentum’ is when the magnetic dipole spins on another
axis orthogonal to the dipole axis. The word ‘forward’ is used because such spin causes
adjacent nodes to rotate, as follows:
1
1.6 When spinning, a node becomes a magnetic dipole and generates Coulomb-like
2 interactions[23] between neighboring dipoles. In a static field of adjacent spinning
2.9 nodes the (+ +) and (- -) poles repulse each other until an all the nodes are so oriented
that a state of equilibrium is reached, even though each node continues to spin around
its own fixed axis. When a node acquires forward spin, additional angular momentum
in multiples of Planck’s constant[24] (h = 6.626068 × 10-34 m2 kg / s) is generated,
(FIG. 2c) and this momentum (p) is passed on completely without ‘friction’ and
distributed to the immediately adjacent nodes in the forward direction. When this
occurs the magnetic dipole axis of the recipient node will twist according to the amount
of momentum it received.
When two or more spinning nodes in a field are forced to lock in place with
opposite poles attracting, (+ -) or (- +) static structures of matter are created (FIG. 3).
FIG. 3 A simple particle forms when two spinning nodes change their
orientation and are ‘locked’ because of the attraction of (+ -) poles. The
orientation angles of the node axes, , and their polyhedral arrangements
define the possible ‘quantum spin’ states of the particle.
This in turn sets the spin orientation and energy of all other surrounding nodes.
It is suggested that the term ‘quantum spin’ be used when referring to spin as it is now
used in (QM). ‘Quantum spin’ does not define a rotation around an axis, but the
possible symmetries of a particle in space.
Everything in (BU), space, energy, radiation, matter is just patterns of nodes

rotating in place and forming the universal lattice. Apart from this rotation around
various axes sharing fixed centers, it is assumed that a node never rolls freely in
space, bounces against matter, collides with other nodes like billiard balls, or flows like
a grain in shifting sand A vast volume of nodes might conceivably slide, shearing from
an adjacent volume, leaving an inhomogeneous ‘fracture’ in the lattice. This will not be
considered here, where it will be assumed that node centers are always fixed, and only
angular momentum is transferred from one node to its neighbor.
The (BU) interactions described above may be all the necessary and sufficient
premises needed to describe all of the known phenomena of physics at its most basic
level.
1.4 RADIATION IN VACUUM
Coulomb-like repulsion and attraction between the spinning magnetized nodes

and self-assembly create a minimum-energy arrangement of nodes in equilibrium that
we know as the vacuum. All the nodes forming the vacuum have identical spin
(1) so=h
The square-face Kepler packing was recently proven to be the densest packing
possible for spheres[25] (FIG. 4), and Gauss proved that the face-centered cubic (FCC)
packing is the densest lattice possible[26]. The (FCC) occurs in nature, for example
ZnS, or zinc blende, has a face-centered cubic arrangement of sulfide ions with zinc
ions in every other tetrahedral hole. An FCC and its tetrahedral components are shown
in (FIG. 4).
FIG. 4 Self-assembly of magnetic dipole nodes oriented in the same direction

as a Kepler packing. Each unit of the packing forms a cube with a node at each
corner, with another node where the cube’s diagonals cross. The smallest
regular volume made up of four nodes would be a tetrahedron (shaded).
HOME
PHYSICS
& MATHS
BEATIFUL
UNIVERSE
SECTIONS:
1
1.6
2
2.9
To maintain this state of minimum energy, the axes of the nodes in vacuum are
in static equilibrium and as nearly parallel as possible. On the other hand, there exists
the possibility that besides their usual rotation about their spin axis, the axis itself is
also rotating about its center, so that all nodes in the universe are in synchronous
rotation around two axes at once unless disturbed. Such rotation in unison would
prevent the + and – poles of adjacent nodes in vacuum from clumping up because of
the attractive Coulomb forces.
The cubic symmetries of the node packing are responsible for the three
dimensions of space. It is unnecessary here to speculate whether the nodes are set in
yet one or more other hidden dimensions, causing their assumed behavior. This
possibility, however, would raise the question of the universe having a center, with
unequal distance and time scales in radial or tangential directions as shown in Fig. 36
below.
Electromagnetic waves are created when an arrangement of matter loses

equilibrium and forward angular momentum is released successively from node to
neighboring node in a falling-domino effect. A given node now possesses spin sv in
integral multiples of (h).
(2) sv= j so =jh (j=1,2,3…)
creating a magnetic effect and capable of forward momentum. In a process similar to

magnetic induction, each node transfers all of its momentum to the handful of nodes in
‘front’ of it in the lattice dividing its energy between them as in (FIG. 5).
FIG. 5 Forward momentum

(large arrows) is
transferred from node A to
neighboring nodes. B gains
most of the momentum,
since it shares the plane
(shaded) in which contains
both of their spin axes. This
gain in angular momentum
causes B to twist by an
angle . Lesser twisting is
experienced by node D
whose axis is normal to that
of the forward momentum
of A. Other nodes such as C
in diagonal directions from
A, twist at even lesser
angles.
This transfer is complete and lossless, and when two or more pulses arrive at a
given node simultaneously, they superpose and interfere, adding their momentum
linearly as vectors (FIG. 6).
FIG. 6. Two modes contributing their

momentums to the adjoining node to
the right. The momentums add
vectorially and interfere according to
their phases.
All the momentum of the donor node is passed to the adjacent nodes and
propagates forward and outwards, spreading from node to node within the lattice (FIG.
7). How much momentum each node receives and in what direction requires careful
analysis: a node directly aligned with the momentum vector will get more forward
y y g g
momentum than that located diagonally to the side. As a result of these interactions
the nodes in free space acquire different amounts of spin and align themselves in
various orientations. The resulting fields will have equipotential surfaces constant
where the change of angle between neighboring nodes is constant. Normal to
constant , the field streamlines are the paths along which the energy of the field is
initially propagated. If the field is in equilibrium the nodes settle in unchanging
HOME orientation, and indicate the field curvature. If momentum is continually being
PHYSICS
& MATHS transferred a radiation field is the result as in (FIG. 7).
As each charged node spins it creates its own magnetic B and electric E fields
BEATIFUL
within itself. These effects only appear when the spinning behavior of adjoining nodes is
UNIVERSE
affected. The use of the B and E terms here is assumed ad hoc, and is only justified by
SECTIONS:
what we know of the macroscopic behavior of radiation, and not from basic principles.
On the scale of the nodes, it is not possible to speak of a continuous streamline line
1 joining three or more congruent nodes, because of the step-like geometry of the
1.6 packing. However, along a line of successive nodes the spin axis changes direction in a
2 harmonic motion similar to that of (FIG. 8)
2.9
FIG. 7. Fields in (BU) can be in equilibrium (a), (b), (c), or time varying
radiation fields (d). In all cases equipotential surfaces ( ) are where node-
to-node orientation is constant. Streamlines (S) are normal to ( ). (d)

The nodes in a radiation field transfer angular momentum along (S) so that
nodes on successive ( ) have different phase angles at various times
t0,t1,t2,…
FIG. 8. Nodes transferring their spin and forward momentum as part of an

electromagnetic pulse radiating along a streamline S in the z direction. The
Magnetic (B) component of the nodes’ rotation creates the electric field and
Electric components (E) create the electric field. Any component of the
rotation in the xy plane creates polarization. The strength of (E) and (B),
hence the intensity, is determined by the node spin. The colors are a graphic
aid and have no physical significance.
1.5 VELOCITY OF INTERACTION, SPACE AND TIME
There is no time dimension presupposed in (BU) theory, only successive

‘instantaneous’ local states of the universe. Spatial directions, i.e. dimensions, do not
have an inherent reality either, but result from the geometry of the node packing.
Distances exist because signals traverse different numbers of nodes in succession.
However for convenience, and to keep track of the various states of a local volume of
space involving many nodes, a minimum unit of time t0 is defined using a hypothetical
separation d0 between nodes, whereby angular momentum in a vacuum free from and
far away from matter, is transferred from node to node with a velocity c0. This is the
maximum speed of light c in vacuum c= co = 2.99792458 times 10^8 meters per
second.
(3) co = do / to
HOME
PHYSICS
If the nodes to which the forward momentum is transferred have a spin s1>s0,
& MATHS
then the pulse will be delayed, and will travel over a smaller number of nodes, i.e. a
BEATIFUL distance, as compared to one in vacuum, where nodes have spin so (FIG. 9).
UNIVERSE
SECTIONS:
1
1.6
2
2.9
FIG. 9 radiation travels at a maximum speed of c0 in a vacuum free of matter,

but at lesser speeds where the potential is higher, i.e. the nodes are denser,
spinning at a higher than the vacuum rate so
Assuming that the relationship between the velocity of transfer depends

linearly on the inverse of the spin of the node receiving the momentum and its
orientation,
(4)
where M is a geometrical inclination factor depending on the direction in the lattice

between the donor node and the node receiving the momentum as will be explained in
section 2.2 below. When the direction is orthogonal to the faces of the FCC M=1, and
√3 when it is diagonal. The pulse velocity cv < co is measured by the distance it travels
compared to an adjacent pulse traveling in vacuum. Straight-line distances are
measured by the number j of nodes a signal traverses:
(5) do=j Mdo (j= 1,2,3…)
A local index of refraction of space n or its inverse can now be defined:
(6)
Angular momentum spreads as energy in the lattice as light would in a

transparent medium having a variable index of refraction such as the atmosphere with
variable density gradients[27], or in a gradient index GRIN lens[28] as in (FIG. 10).
FIG. 10 (a) A light wave radiates in vacuum of index of refraction no=1 (b) In
an inhomogeneous potential field of variable index of refraction the wave is
distorted accordingly by refraction. Particles (not shown) having the same
momentum and traveling in the same media would be similarly ‘refracted’
(large arrows).
10/23/22, 8:35 AM Beautiful Universe Section 1.6
BEAUTIFUL UNIVERSE
1.6 MATTER
While radiation is a dynamic spreading group pattern of momentum passed from

HOME node to node, matter at rest is a pattern of nodes with their axes locked in position or
PHYSICS rotating in place, the result of mutual attraction and repulsion in static or dynamic
& MATHS equilibrium within the lattice.
BEATIFUL The axes of locked nodes are oriented along a direction defined by two angles
UNIVERSE according to some chosen coordinate system. The nodes form edges or vertices
SECTIONS:
1 of 3-dimensional polyhedral structures, the simplest of which is a tetrahedron. For
example the two nodes of FIG. 3 have their axes aligned along the same line. Here the
1.6 twist in the node polarity defines the quantum spin (qs) of the particle. (qs)
2
describes geometrical orientations and symmetries, and not spin (s) in the sense of
2.9
rotation used above. The 3D geometry allows larger pieces of matter, existing within
larger polyhedra, to have many more possible orientations. A node cannot change its
axis without affecting those of the surrounding nodes with the locked nodes both within
matter and in the surrounding field up to infinity. To do so requires a lot of energy, as
illustrated in the hypothetical case of a unit particle made up of two adjacent nodes
locked as a particle as in (FIG. 11).
A hypothetical ‘explosion’ of two-node matter in a vacuum lattice is imagined. At

time t= t0 all nodes except node A are assumed to be oriented in the same upwards
direction and having unit spin (s). Due to some influx of momentum from the left, (not
shown) A untwists, its axis of orientation and rotates by 180° (π radians) suddenly,
while its twin remains fixed. This twist constitutes forward momentum, but its direction
is not radially outwards in the plane of the spin axis, but normal to that axis. The
adjoining nodes adjust their orientation accordingly, and the twist-induced momentum
is transferred as a pulse radiating as a hemispherical shell at a velocity co .The number
of nodes J on any hemisphere of radius (r) is J=an2 π r2 where (an) is the average
number of nodes per unit area of a large sphere. In one second the shell reaches the
nodes aligned on hemisphere H of radius c0 (the distance energy travels in vacuum in
one second) so that Jc0= an 2π c02. In this one second each of the J nodes has twisted
by π or less, according to its position on H the total change. A full twist in one second
represents a gain of angular momentum of (h).
FIG. 11 A hypothetical example of matter releasing its locked energy. (a) Node
A in vacuum is locked with another node to form a particle. (b) Forces (not
shown here) force Node A to rotate by π about an axis normal to its spin axis,
acquiring state A’. (c) The released momentum from A causes a twisting effect
to be transferred radially from node to adjacent nodes, and after one second
the effect reaches nodes such as B, aligned in a hemisphere H of radius co (d)
Lattice nodes on the surface of the hemisphere of surface area 2πco2 now
contain all the momentum originally found in node A in its locked state. A
reversed version of this process is also possible, whereas the nodes on the
surface transfer their momentum inwards creating matter by twisting A’ into
locked matter A.
Assuming that an average node twists by angle b, where 0<b<p, and since
there is a vast number of nodes on H, any fractional (h) in the total can be disregarded,
the total momentum M acquired by the nodes on H is:
(7) MH=2π an bhc02
Equating MH with the rest energy E originally locked within A, and letting
(8) m= 2 π an bh
(9) E = m co2
(Eqs. 8 and 9) define an attribute (m) of matter in units of angular momentum

(h).
HOME The process imagined above is reversible, and can be used to describe the
PHYSICS creation of matter from the implosion of spin from nodes H. The angular momentum
& MATHS reaching the center from all directions simultaneously causes A’ to become twisted into
its ‘matter orientation’ A. In a realistic situation, the particle of matter will have its own
BEATIFUL infinite gravitational field, where each node’s axis will be twisted to some extent,
UNIVERSE adjusting to the orientation of the adjacent nodes. Also the spin of the originating nodes
SECTIONS: may be much more than unity in the case of massive particles. At large distances from
1 a particle the field will tend to be more spherical but very close to asymmetrical
particles the surrounding field will also be inhomogeneous.
1.6
2 The resulting equilibrium of locked nodes of matter particles is very similar to
that of the Tensegrity sculptures of Kenneth Snelson[29] and Buckminster Fuller.
2.9
Rods under compression are freely suspended in space without touching one other, held
by wires under tension joining the ends of the rods (FIG. 12).
FIG. 12. A basic floating

compression (tensegrity) structure,
by Kenneth Snelson, the inventor of
the concept. The rods under
compression are held in place
without touching each other, by taut
strings. In (BU) theory the nodes
making up particles of matter are
similarly held in place without
physical contact, because the
balance of attractive and repulsive
Coulomb forces between the nodes.
The rods resemble a basic weave or
knot pattern.
(Adapted from
http://www.kennethsnelson.net/icons/struc.htm )
Such sculptures need one or more anchor point in the ground to stay in
equilibrium, but in the (BU) lattice the locked nodes are surrounded by the repulsive
forces of the surrounding gravitational field. Svenson himself realized the importance of
this sort of constructivist principle to build a model of the atom. He discovered another
principle relevant to the architecture of the nucleus: a system of magnetized tops
arrayed symmetrically in a spherical formation would induce each other into
synchronous rotation (FIG 13).
FIG. 13. Kenneth Snelson’s illustration of the magnetic tops whose axes meet
at the center, to model nuclei. The number of synchronously rotating tops
making up each model are (left to right): 32, 18, 14, 10, 8, 5, 2.
From http://www.kennethsnelson.net/icons/atom.htm )[29]
Buckminster Fuller (who coined the word Tensegrity) believed that all nature is a
‘synergy’ of structure and energy based on the tetrahedron[30]. He speculated about
nuclear structure in terms of nested polyhedra (FIG. 14) based tetrahedral design
principle. The spherical domes he invented are based on this design philosophy. Nature
seemed to agree with this when the molecule C60 called the
Buckminsterfullerene[31],[32] was synthesized and found to follow the same

design principle as the domes (FIG. 15).
FIG. 14 A drawing made in 1948 FIG 15 Schematic diagram of a
by R. Buckminster Fuller, Buckminsterfullerene C 60 molecule.
analyzing the space-packing
possibilities of structures based From
on the tetrahedron. http://sbchem.sunysb.edu/msl/fullerene.html
From Synergetics by R.
Buckminster Fuller[81]
HOME
PHYSICS
& MATHS
BEATIFUL Using an alternative formulation of (QM), Cook[33], [34] has

UNIVERSE demonstrated how nuclei can be modeled as various particles in a Face-Centered-Cubic
SECTIONS: lattice forming a crystal-like structure (FIG.16).
1
FIG. 16. Norman Cook’s model of
1.6 nuclear particles from his Nuclear
2 Visualization Software shows a
2.9 distinctive crystal-like arrangement in a
face-centered-cubic FCC lattice.
From http://www.res.kutc.kansai-
u.ac.jp/~cook/NVSIndex.html
Stedjee examines the possibility of using the neutrino, the smallest known
particle as a building block for all matter[35]. A common feature of all the above
proposals for matter is that they rely on a principle of constructing polyhedra from
simple building blocks. In (BU) only one type of ‘block’, the node, will be required.
1.7 GRAVITATION
If the process of adding angular momentum from the outer shells of (FIG. 10)
continues after the nucleus of matter is formed, all the nodes surrounding the pyramid
will acquire more spin, aligning themselves radially to the orientation of the locked
nodes at the center. This surrounding pattern of spinning nodes is also locked in place,
with the angles between congruent nodes decreasing with distance from the center,
the results of self-assembly of the nodes adjusting their orientation to reach a state of
minimum energy.
Matter and the infinite field of surrounding nodes now achieve a state of
equilibrium: matter within its gravitational field (FIG.17) can be thought of somewhat
as the internal pressure inside a bubble of gas balancing that of the surrounding fluid.
FIG. 17. Two nodes forming the

simplest of particles are oriented
along opposite sides of the
tetrahedron in the center of the
figure. As shown by the arrows
they induce the surrounding nodes
to orient their axis accordingly to
form the surrounding gravitational
field. The nodes are shaded to
indicate their weakening spin
energy as their distance from the
center increases.
The nodes do not necessarily stop rotating when locked in place, but can create
a standing gravitational wave pattern with a wavelength inversely proportional to the
mass, recalling the de Broglie hypothesis. Is this is the result of mutual interference or
of resonance within matter? If matter as a whole rotates or decays a gravitational wave
is radiated accordingly.
Starting from the spinning nodes at the surface of matter, each node’s angular
momentum balances that of two or more further out in the network, so that nodes on a
spherical surface centered on matter will be equipotential. To ensure the field’s
equilibrium, nodes on any spherical shell of a radius r surrounded matter must have a
total energy equal to that of nodes on any other shell. It becomes clear that the
gravitational potential - i.e. the total spin of a given node- ( grav) is both dependent
on the original mass’ total energy and inversely proportional to the surface area of the
sphere of radius r it lies on.
(10) grav= G0 (∑ angular momentum of all the nodes locked in matter) /

r2
Which is Newton’s famous result[36] interpreted in terms of (BU) where the

summation is the mass of the particle, and G0 is the experimentally derived
gravitational constant, relating node spin and momentum with the amount of twisting of
adjacent nodes. In (BU) G0 is related to the repulsive force from node to node (which
may be less than the experimentally derived G used for macroscopic objects as will be
discussed below.
HOME
PHYSICS
& MATHS
BEATIFUL
UNIVERSE
SECTIONS:
1
1.6
2
2.9
FIG. 18 Gravitational attraction is due to the fact that all the nodes making up
the particles and their surrounding gravitational fields all spin in the same
sense (shown by the curved arrows inside the nodes) . This aligns the field
nodes according to polarity (large curved arrows). At the center of the ether
volume between the particles (shaded area, shown in detail at bottom), the
nodes experience (+ -) attraction instead of the (++) and (- -) repulsion. This
initiates chirality i.e. a spiral twist in the central nodes and the effect is carried
on back to the nodes. The relative momentum in the nodes surrounding the
particles on their opposite sides now becomes stronger than that of the nodes
in facing sides. This imbalance in momentum ‘pressure’ constitutes a force
(large arrows) which starts the gravitational acceleration of the two particles
towards each other.
If two clusters of matter A and B exist at some distance from each other, the
nodes along lines joining A and B will have the nodes in their fields oriented in opposite
directions. This is because all nodes in (BU) spin in the same direction (clockwise or
anticlockwise relative to their own magnetic poles). In a situation such as that of (FIG.
18), the field nodes along a line AB experience disequilibrium. Their spin axes angles
change, relieving the induced forces on them, and uncoiling like a spring. This
decreases the momentum of the nodes along AB. To restore balance, angular
momentum is transferred to A and B from the outer surrounding nodes, which forces
them to move towards each other filling the energy void created along the line AB. The
process of uncoiling the nodes along AB continues, until the system finally finds
equilibrium when A and B collide into each other. More complicated situations involving
three or more objects involve similar processes.
1.8 DYNAMICS: FORCE, INERTIAL MASS, AND MOTION
In (BU) a particle of matter is a pattern of nodes locked in place in different

orientations. When an influx of new angular momentum arrives from a given direction
the added energy is absorbed by the particle, ‘forcing’ the nodes of the particle to spin
faster. This force initiates a complex process of transferring the extra momentum of all
the nodes of matter in the same direction as the original ‘force’. Matter experiences
motion (FIG. 19).
FIG. 19
Motion of a
particle
across a
lattice of
nodes: the
nodes
themselves
do not
move, only
their
pattern of
spin. At
time t1 the
particle at
left
experiences
new
momentum
impinging
on it as a
force (F)
The particle’s spin pattern is translated to its new position at time t2. The
surrounding gravitational field nodes’ pattern (right) experiences a similar
transfer in position.
It is essential to examine the minute changes that would then occur to the
geometry of the particle as it changes states. In both optics and data processing, when
HOME an image or signal is made to cross over itself linearly without losing its shape, the
PHYSICS process is called a self-convolution. When a particle experiences a force, the
& MATHS momentum added to the first nodes in its path at the particle’s edge absorbs this
momentum, which affects both its energy and orientation. This in turn affects the
BEATIFUL adjacent nodes. Self-convolution involves all the nodes in contact with the force, and
UNIVERSE continues within the volume of the particle, until all the impinging new momentum is
SECTIONS: absorbed (FIG. 20).
1
1.6 The process is not confined to the nodes within the particle itself. The added
momentum is then directed from the particle to its own surrounding gravitational field.
2
Unlike the case of an electromagnetic wave traveling in vacuum at the maximum speed
2.9
of light c0, the particle’s pattern is now translated to the gravitational field at a rate v
< c0 . The reason for this slower speed is that the index of refraction of space within the
particle and in its gravitational field is n>>1. The particle’s forward momentum is being
dragged by of its own internal energy and that of its surrounding gravitational field.
That is why matter has inertial mass, a property that only manifests itself when an
external force is applied.
FIG. 20. Motion of a particle involves a process of self-convolution of its

constituent nodes. The arrows link the nodes of the particle in its initial state
and the nodes after it moves to the right (dashed lines). Similar transfer of
states (not shown for clarity) occurs in all the surrounding nodes. In this
simple example, each node’s state is transferred to a ‘new’ node. The state of
node A however is added to that of B, and B’s to C. More complex particles
involve many more such overlapping states.
In the case of gravitational attraction the two particles moving towards each
other also experiences self-convolution. In this case however, there is no gravitational
‘force’ as such causing the motion, only an imbalance of the repulsive forces of the
nodes surrounding both particles.
To summarize this process: matter absorbs new forward momentum as a force

applied in one direction. Its nodes absorb this force and transfer the energy internally
from node to node, affecting both the rate of spin and the orientation of the absorbing
nodes. Self-convolution proceeds over across the object and continues over its pre-
existing gravitational field. In its various states the particle shifts as a whole pattern of
nodes by steps d0 and at a certain velocity v depending on the original energy or mass
of the particle’s nodes, and the force.
Another way to visualize convoluted motion is through the concept of Fresnel

drag[37] [38], when the velocity of light cfluid in a fluid of index of refraction n
moving at a velocity v, becomes:
(11 )
(13)
Where( fresnel involves the same variables as
HOME
PHYSICS
& MATHS
(14)
BEATIFUL
UNIVERSE This is the relativistic term familiar in the equations of (SR) and (GR), affecting
SECTIONS: time, mass and length of a moving object. In (BU) the moving particle is conceived of
1 as a fluid pattern of nodes transferring energy at a velocity (v). The pattern of matter
moves as a group with velocity v, but the momentum inside the pattern moves at a
1.6 faster velocity vfresnel . Such an effect can also be observed in ripples in a pond when
2 the circular outline of a group of ripples is spreading at a certain speed, but the ripples
2.9 appearing from the inner rim move at a faster speed and disappear at the outer rim.
The same phenomena has been analyzed by LaFreniere in terms of a Doppler
shift[39] in the frequency of the signal in the moving particle.
Since there is no time dimension in (BU) all these changes will be merely successive
changes of the state of the nodes as a whole. Motion as such is perceived only when an
observer remembers and compares the various states, or a record is kept such as
frames in a movie film, or as a record in computer memory is made.
1.9 SUMMARY OF THE (BU) ASSUMPTIONS
The basic physical structure of the Beautiful Universe model outlined above is
extremely simple, describing a universe made up of identical charged particles (nodes),
self-assembled into a locally regular network. These nodes never change their positions
in the lattice, but interact only with adjacent nodes by transmitting the angular
momentum they carry. This occurs without loss, through effects similar to electrostatic
attraction and repulsion. All interactions are linear, and follow the logic of cause and
effect. The state of each node is defined solely by the rate of spin and the direction of
its angular momentum. Any change in the state of any one node is transmitted through
contiguous nodes sequentially to all the nodes in the universe at a local velocity v=co/n,
where n =>1 is a node density index, comparing its actual spin energy to that of a node
in an ideal vacuum. In this case an ideal vacuum is one not only free from radiation and
particles, but is not part of any gravitational field of matter, however far. Patterns of
nodes can assemble into dynamic radiation fields in space, or lock themselves as matter
including its infinite surrounding gravitational field. A local volume of nodes is in
equilibrium when each node’s forward momentum equals that of the vector sum of the
adjacent nodes. Otherwise, when a transfer of momentum, radiation is created, or
matter patterns are created, made to move or to rotate. Disequilibrium also initiates
the emission or absorption of radiation by matter, and in extreme cases the unlocking of
matter into radiation. In (BU) the maximum signal velocity between nodes is co the
velocity of light in an ideal vacuum.
Previous Top Next

REFERENCES FOR THIS SECTION
[29] Kenneth Snelson Kenneth Snelson Exhibition: The Nature of Structure
The New York Academy of Sciences, January - April 1989 online at

http://www.kennethsnelson.net/
[30] Buckminster Fuller, R., Synergetics online at Buckminster Fuller
Institute. first published Macmillan 1975,1979
http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/toc/status.html
[31] Nature 347, 354-358 (27 Sep 1990)
[32] Kroto, H. Symmetry, Space, Stars and C . Noble Prize in Chemistry

60
lecture 1996.
http://nobelprize.org/chemistry/laureates/1996/kroto-
lecture.pdf . Sussex Fullerine Research Centre:
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Users/kroto/FullereneCentre/
[33] Cook, N.D. &. Dallacasa, V. Face-centered solid-phase theory of the

nucleus. Physical Review C 35, 1883-1890, 1987.
Cook, N.D Nuclear Visualization Software in:
http://www.res.kutc.kansai-u.ac.jp/~cook/NVSIndex.html
Cook, N. & Musulmanbekov, G. Nuclear Structure Theory Reconstructed Using a Quark

Model: Liquid-Drop, Cluster and
Independent- Particle Model Features:
http://k9.physics.indiana.edu/~eric/QNP/QNP/QNP_2004_talks/session1_Monday/N_Cook.pdf
BEAUTIFUL UNIVERSE
2. CONCEPTS IN 20th. CENTURY PHYSICS RE-
HOME EXPRESSED IN TERMS OF BEAUTIFUL UNIVERSE
PHYSICS
& MATHS THEORY
BEATIFUL 2.1 GENERAL NATURE OF THE (BU) THEORY
UNIVERSE
SECTIONS: An attempt will be made in the following sections to outline qualitatively how
1 some basic Newtonian, (SR), (GR) and (QM) concepts can be ‘reverse engineered’ – i.e.
1.6 their results are first separated from their original theoretical and mathematical
frameworks, then reconstructed using the premises and interactions of (BU) theory.
2
2.9 While (BU) theory is causal and local, it is not classical, since no continuous
integral processes are possible: the nodes are discrete with units of action h, and other
than the spin of individual nodes in situ, absolutely nothing else actually moves. Unlike
classical theories, no preconceived ideas about mass or motion are used, but these
concepts are developed from first principles. Assuming neither flexible spacetime nor
the constancy of the speed of light, the theory is not relativistic (SR) or (GR) either. The
speed of light is the maximum speed between nodes, so a simple Galilean relativity
does not apply. There are no inherent time and space dimensions in (BU), but to aid
keeping track of the changes of the state of the universe, a fixed time dimension can be
defined as described above. Even so, this time dimension should not be thought of as a
standard universal time zone, since all interactions are measured locally, and signals
from various distances arrive at various times relative to their distance and velocity of
the source. Three fixed space dimensions can be defined from the geometry of the
nodes, but again such directions are not absolute in the universe as a whole. Nor does
(BU) depend on concepts of probability so it is not a variation on (QM) in its
Copenhagen interpretation.
A curious aspect of (BU) is that concepts that were simple in classical physics becomes
complex, while (SR) and (GR) on the other hand become simple. Motion, which was
considered a simple change of position of a whole mass in time, now involves the
complex process of self-convolution. This involves all the nodes making up the mass as
well as those in its own gravitational field in which it is moving. Conversely, (SR) and
(GR) can be derived simply from the model without using complex equations of
differential geometry to describe a physically unrealistic flexible spacetime dimension.
There are the usual relativistic effects in (BU) but they can be derived from the model
using classical concepts. Similarly the results of (QM) can be re-formulated on the basis
of the electromagnetic waves transferred within a field of nodes. It is speculated that
only two basic constants co and h are necessary to describe nature, and that all other
constants, including the constant of universal gravitation G can be derived from them.
If these expectations are confirmed, then all the laws of physics can be derived
systematically and quantitatively from the handful of a priori premises of (BU), revised
as necessary. If successful, this would be the basis of a unified theory of physics. Such
a systematic ‘theory of everything’ (TOE) is too ambitious a task for this speculative
paper and will be left for future work if the (BU) concepts are found feasible.
2.2 A DISCRETE CALCULUS FOR (BU)
The reductionist nature of BU demands matching mathematical methods. Newton

developed the calculus to describe concepts such as acceleration. Einstein adapted the
language of differential geometry and tensors to describe his notions of flexible space
and time. No new or difficult mathematics is necessary to describe (BU) interactions.
The node structure in (BU) resembles that of 3-dimensional arrangements of atoms in
crystals or metals, so some of the well-developed notation to describe the various
orientations of facets[40] might be useful in developing (BU) interactions. Unlike
crystals however, (BU) has no free electrons transporting electricity or diffusing heat, so
this comparison should not be taken too far.
Rather, in (BU) a field or action is described by a summation of discrete intervals or

stepwise changes. The summation symbol ∑ of discrete calculus [41]now appears
instead of the integeral . It is only on the scale of relatively large distances on the
atomic or molecular scale and larger that the incremental nature of BU can be ignored,
and phenomena can then be treated with continuous integrals. Continuous integral
fields only apply when the Xmax the maximum physical dimensions considered are much
larger than the node-to-node distance do. A scaling factor Sc is proposed to judge when
(BU) interactions warrant a discrete treatment.
(15)
An interaction would be quantum in nature if Sc is, say, between zero and one, and
classical for larger values. (BU) functions are complete in themselves, but for the sake
of comparison with current models, they may be regarded as a regular sampling[42] at
the nodes of such continuous functions. In (BU) there is no conflict between
descriptions of the macroscopic world of large objects and the quantum world (FIG. 21).
If each node is given a label axyz then the very geometry of the lattice resembles a sort
of matrix, and matching mathematical matrices can be developed to describe various
interactions. It will be discussed in section 2.7 how Heisenberg’s matrices in QM might
be derived from this geometry. Similarly the tensors of general relativity describing the
local deformation of spacetime can also be reinterpreted within (BU), using the
moments of the nodes to define local density.
HOME Since there is no space between the nodes, a signal travels between two nodes A and B
PHYSICS within a volume of space in (BU) only via the network of intervening nodes. A ‘straight
& MATHS line’ will actually be a jagged zigzag of segments, not a smooth diagonal crossing over
an infinitely divisible space. The total path length of, say a ray of light, will be larger by
BEATIFUL a factor of 1=<FL =<√3 depending on the direction of the line within the cubic lattice in
UNIVERSE three dimensional space. For example, in the case of the line AB in Figure 21(c), aligned
SECTIONS: exactly diagonally across the cubic lattice, FL =√3 .
1
1.6
2
2.9
FIG. 21. Discrete Calculus in (BU). (a) A function in the x-y plane of a volume
of nodes centered on an arbitrarily chosen node (0) is described by summation
functions ∑ showing discrete quantum behavior from node to node. The
maximum function value Xmax is of the same order of magnitude as the node-
to-node distance do. Distances are not measured in straight lines such as OC,
but along zigzag paths connecting the nodes. (b) In macroscopic systems in
(BU), Xmax>>do and the same function can be described by integrals (c)
Multiple paths are possible from node A to node B in a two or three

dimensional volume of space.
Vectors too will describe zigzag paths on the scale of the nodes. A macroscopic vector
from any node A to node B will be identical to the summation of smaller node-to-node
vectors starting from A along any path or paths to B. This concept is useful in
expressing treatments such as Feynman’s sum over histories[43] of an interaction.
Another significant aspect of (BU) is that functions such as the gravitational potential
containing inverse distances never explode into infinity as in the case of (GR), because
in (BU) a distance can never be zero, i.e. less than do.
2.3 AN ETHER TO CARRY ALL INTERACTIONS
(BU) is a new type of ether theory, a substance that was supposed to fill all of
space and argued over since antiquity[44]. The crucial difference between (BU) and
earlier concepts of ether is that in (BU) everything is made up of the ether. The
distinction between solid matter, energy, and empty space that has confused most of
the earlier theories does not occur in (BU). Descartes had speculated that light is
transmitted in space by the action of tiny vortices[45] (FIG 22), not too different from
the nodes of (BU).
HOME
PHYSICS
& MATHS
BEATIFUL
UNIVERSE
SECTIONS:
1
1.6
2
2.9
FIG. 22 Descartes’ vortices

FIG. 23 The ether mechanism
envisioned by J. C. Maxwell in 1861
Thomas Young theorized that diffraction of light is due to its refraction in a

dense medium adjacent to matter[46]. Faraday assumed the existence of lines of force
in space to carry magnetic effects.[47] At one time Maxwell[48] had assumed such a
mechanical model of an ether for his electromagnetic field, and imagined a system of
gears surrounded by particles interacting together to carry the field along (FIG. 23).
When Michelson and Morley’s experiments[49] showed that light is not retarded
by its passage through a supposed ether, it caused a crisis in physics. How was light
transmitted? Thompson (Lord Kelvin)[50] was a firm believer in the ether, and that
atoms were knots in it. As the discoverer of the electron he believed that both atoms
and the ether were electrical vortices, but failed to translate this idea into a complete
theory. It is interesting that recent topological researches now show that aspects of
knot theory are closely linked to gauge fields and gravity[51] and to quantum field
theory [20]. By adopting the two postulates of the constancy of the speed of light in a
flexible space and time, and the principle of equivalence of all inertial frames, Einstein’s
(SR) succeeded in describing the electrodynamics of moving bodies without recourse to
the concept of an ether. The ether seemed to have evaporated forever.
Ironically it was Einstein himself who lectured in 1922 on the need for an
ether[52], some years after the results of (SR) and (GR) were experimentally proven.
He needed a medium to carry his mesh of ‘clocks and measuring rods’. In 1954 Dirac
said “...the failure of the world’s physicists to find such a (satisfactory) theory, after
many years of intensive research, leads me to think that the aetherless basis of physical
theory may have reached the end of its capabilities and to see in the ether a new hope
for the future.” [53]. Recently there has been speculation that the fifth dimension in
the Kaluza-Klein solution[54] for Einstein’s equations is a lattice of ether nodes.
2.4 FITZGERALD’S, LORENTZ’S, AND EINSTEIN’S (SR) THEORIES

EMERGE DIRECTLY IN (BU)
In the second half of the 19th Century it was discovered that Maxwell’s
equations failed to account for events in frames of reference moving relative to each
other. Soon afterwards Heaviside[55], Fitzgerald, Lorentz [56]and Poincare, put
forward various classical theories proposing length contraction and time dilation to
correct problems in applying Maxwell’s equations in moving frames of reference, and to
explain why such transformations make it impossible to detect the ether.
Unfortunately instead of extending these earlier results, Einstein chose to recast

them using a mathematically equivalent model. He proposed, without relying on any
experiment or observation from nature, that it is space itself that contracts, and time
itself that dilates in a moving frame; not merely the length of the measuring rod, and
clock time used by an observer in a relatively moving frame. This allowed him to assign
a fixed velocity of light c=contracting space / dilating time. Einstein’s arbitrary
postulates imposed an elegant abstract unity in the laws of physics, which then become
independent of frames of reference, but at the cost of a loss of physical realism. This
does not belittles his lasting contribution in (SR) 8 : that electromagnetic radiation with
a maximum velocity of c has a fundamental role in defining space and time. FIG. 24
compares the concept of
(SR) with its multiple moving frames of reference, to a realistic frameless universe
where meaningful physical events only occur locally at the smallest scale possible.
FIG. 24.
Special
and
General
Relativity
HOME
describe
PHYSICS
the
& MATHS
motion of
bodies
BEATIFUL
with a
UNIVERSE
separate
SECTIONS:
frame of
1
reference
1.6
for each
2 moving
2.9 object.
Within
each
object a
spacetime
grid is
distorted
differently
according
to its motion (arrows). Beautiful Universe Theory describe such motions within
a regular fixed lattice geometry made up of nodes of varying energy and
orientation exchanging momentum locally, simplifying the description.
In (BU) the results of (SR), but not its premises, can be adapted from any of the
many and various available classical derivations of the Lorentz transformations, the
earliest being Heaviside’s55 analysis of how a sphere of charges contracts in the
direction of motion to become an ellipsoid (FIG. 25). Of course it is not the individual
nodes themselves that change shape, but the energy pattern they define in the lattice.
LaFreniere[57] explains length contraction in classical fields as a consequence of a
Doppler shift in electron spherical standing waves making up matter.
FIG. 25. The Heaviside

Ellipsoid. A spherical
arrangement of charges
will contract in the
direction of its motion to
become an ellipsoid. In
(BU) this will be the simple
consequence of a Doppler
shift in the de Broglie
electron standing waves
making up an atom.
Heaviside concluded that a charge moving at a velocity v is equivalent to an electric

field following the form:
(16)
where E is evaluated at a point with displacement r from the center of the charge
distribution and q is the angle between r and the direction of motion. The length
contraction in (BU), however, is a combination of a ‘real’ contraction combined with the
effects of a contraction due to measurement from an outside frame. Because of
Heaviside contraction, the number of nodes the matter spans lengthwise during its
motion is smaller than those when it is stationary. An outside observer then attempt to
measure this length of a moving body for example by sending light signals to mirrors
attached to the front and the back of the body, and comparing the signal arrival times.
Because of a Doppler shift in these signals, the frequency increases, and this is
equivalent to a time dilation. In (BU) it is these physical effects of length contraction
due to the compression at impact, multiplied by the dilation in the timing factor that
should explain the (SR) length contraction.
Similar ‘physical’ arguments about the gain of mass of a moving body can be
made in (BU): it is just the momentum added to its internal energy upon impact that
affects this increase. Using the classical Lorentzian transformations featuring, the mass,
length and measured clock time of a body ‘moving’ at a velocity v= cs= c0 /n can be
derived in (BU). The body’s energy pattern is transmitted across the lattice at a velocity
v. And as we have seen, is a fundamental property of node, its potential energy or
‘density’, whether the node is found within matter, in a radiation field, or in empty
space.
A useful way to analyze the (SR) transformations in (BU) is the following. The
cores of atoms are an assemblage of locked nuclear matter whose size is insignificant,
as compared to the overall size of the atom’s outer shells, defined by the electrons
oscillating in standing de Broglie waves[58]. When an inelastic force impinges on
HOME matter, forward momentum is added to it, which travels like a wave from node to node.
PHYSICS The spherical standing waves making up the shells are compressed into Heaviside
& MATHS ellipsoids and the energy pattern is transferred within the object in this contracted form,
until the force’s momentum is expended. This can be developed into a formalism
BEATIFUL whereby a force F of nodes with forward momentum first causes the contraction of the
UNIVERSE stationary object it collides with. Then, after the stationary object contracts, it moves
SECTIONS: forward with a velocity v. This links Newton’s ideas of force and motion with the Lorentz
1 transformation of length. These effects appear in the abstract formulation of (SR)
1.6 because length contraction actually occurs in nature, as explained in (FIG. 26). Similarly
the (SR) effect of time dilation is explained as an actual delay in the time of arrival of
2 light signals used by an outside observer, in the act of measuring the length, once the
2.9 body starts to move.
FIG. 26. Force, Momentum, Motion and Lorentz transformations. At time to

momentum arrives as a force F on a molecule made up of four atoms of length
Lo (circles, at bottom). The momentum is absorbed and two of the atoms are
contracted into Heaviside ellipsoids (middle). By time t1 all the momentum
has been absorbed by three atoms (top). The Lorentz contraction is Ls and the
final length of the molecule is Lv. At time t2 the entire contracted molecule
starts its motion at a velocity V. Anytime after t2 an outside observer from a
fixed point O attempts to measure the length of the molecule by sending light
beams (dashed lines) to attached mirrors. The Doppler-shifted times of arrival
of the light are equivalent to a time dilation, and the estimate of length Lv is
further contracted.
2.5 THE HAMILTONIAN ANALOGY, (GR), MAXWELL’S AND SCHRÖDINGER’S

EQUATIONS IN (BU)
The second unique contribution of Einstein in relativity theory was his discovery
of the equivalence of gravity with acceleration, a result admired by Lorentz himself.
Again Einstein used the concept of flexible spacetime to describe the resulting
deformations, using complicated tensor mathematics. Eddington, who proved (GR)
experimentally by measuring the predicted deviation of starlight by the sun’s gravity,
hinted that GR could be explained in simple classical terms: Eddington argued that
gravity affect the density of space, causing its index of refraction (n) to increase and
what he called the ‘coordinate velocity’ of light to slow down[59].
In the (BU) model the strength of the gravitational field is described by nxyz the
local relative ‘density’ of the nodes. As (n) changes from node to node, the velocity of
signals there changes- i.e. signals accelerate as (n) changes. In this way (BU) provides
a physical explanation for the famous equivalence of gravity with acceleration in GR. A
description of signals in such a field of variable n reduces to the Hamiltonian
Analogy[60], an enduring idea mentioned by Ibn Al-Haytham (Hazen) in the 10th
Century, that the path of a particle in a potential field resembles that of a ray of light
traveling in a medium of variable index of refraction[61] (FIG. 27). The Analogy was
systematically developed in the 18th Century by Hamilton[62], [63]who posited that a

particle’s energy is always constant made up of variable potential and kinetic energy
(17) E = P.E. + K.E
an equation known as the Hamiltonian. In (BU) P.E. is the node’s internal energy, its
spin, while its K.E. is its forward momentum, i.e. how it affects its immediate
HOME environment. In optics the eikonal equation[64] relates (n) to the potential:
PHYSICS
& MATHS
(18)
BEATIFUL
UNIVERSE
SECTIONS:
1
1.6
2
2.9
FIG. 27. The Hamiltonian Analogy in (BU). Variable potential energy (indicated
by the shades of the nodes) implies that volumes of space transmit node-to-
node signals at different velocities and will have different indices of refraction
(n). The laws of geometrical optics then apply to both radiation streamlines
(S) and the paths of moving particles (P). Along these paths the transmitted
energy is constant, equaling the potential energy plus the kinetic energy at
any given point. (a) Snell’s law applies to a geodesic crossing an interface
between a field of energetic (i.e. dense) nodes of index of refraction n1 to one
with n2<n1. (b) A dipole field has a radial distribution of n causing
streamlines S to curve in circular paths. A particle crossing this field curves
accordingly. (c) A Schwarzschild metric for the gravity of a particle at the
center, is interpreted in (BU) in terms of local density variations without
invoking spacetime distortions. The curvature of a geodesic (P) for a particle
is similar to the bending of light passing through the dense gravitational field
of a star.
In electromagnetic fields the paths along which the energy is transmitted

(normal to the equipotential surfaces ) are the streamlines S. According to (GR) test
particles in a potential field always travel along straight-line geodesics in a curved
spacetime. In classical physics and in (BU), and in accordance with the Hamiltonian
Analogy, an inhomogeneous gravitational potential causes light and test particles to
accelerate along curved streamlines S in ‘straight’ space and time coordinates. This
agrees with Euler’s result relating acceleration a=dv/dt with a change in curvature, d
/dt . Accelaration can also be expressed as in Eq. 19 .
(19)
Using a result from optics, the curvature k can also be expressed in terms of the index
of refraction n
(20) k= n grad log n
Where n is the unit normal to the equipotential (ie tangent to the streamline S
orthogonal to it) at a point in the field. The description above should yield the same
results as (GR), except that in (BU) the physical situation would be much simpler,
merely requiring an iterative incremental linear solution of Snell’s law for the deflection
of light in adjacent media of different indices of refraction. This was demonstrated by
Tamari[22] for a simple dipole field. These effects are linear in (BU), and can be applied
numerically to any configuration of matter, however complex its shape, inhomogeneities
in its composition, or a mixed pattern of motions (linear, rotational, etc.) of its various
parts. This is in contrast to (GR) where solutions to Einstein’s complicated tensor
equations are only known for a few simple cases such as a sphere.
(BU) also provides a physical explanation of why there is no dipole solution for
Einstein’s (GR) equations, while solutions exist for quadrupoles and higher terms: The
smallest piece of matter in (BU) is made up of two nodes, each node being a dipole.
Two adjacent dipoles make up a quadrupole.
The Hamiltonian operator, which is related to (Eq. 17) is a fundamental part of

Schrödinger’s Equation[65] , the basis of (QM), reinforcing the belief that in (BU), (GR)
HOME and (QM) can be unified in a single theory. Conversely it should be possible to derive
PHYSICS Schrödinger’s equation in (BU) by equating the mass of a particle with the total
& MATHS momentum (in multiples of (h)) of the nodes it is made up of, and considering their
mutual interactions as standing spherical waves in the shell of an atom.
BEATIFUL
UNIVERSE Maxwell’s equations can be derived directly in (BU) from the fact that along the
SECTIONS: streamlines in free space the electric and magnetic effects generated by each node
1 propagate as a sinusoidal wave at a velocity c0/n. along streamlines S. Maxwell’s
1.6 continuity equation can also be derived directly because the energy transmitted along
any given streamline is a constant. A small volume of space which encloses a bundle of
2 such streamlines transmits equal amounts of current in and out of that volume.
2.9 Maxwell deduced the velocity of electromagnetic radiation c0 from the square root of
the permittivity of free space divided by its permeability. In (Eq. 4) the vacuum node’s
spin in units of (h) decides the speed of propagation c0, suggesting a relation between
all these quantities.
2.6 NO DUALITY IN (BU): THE PHOTON IS A WAVE PATTERN OF NODES
Using statistical arguments, Einstein showed that light is not a mere wave, but
comes in photons as he called energy quanta, multiples of Planck’s constant h.
Regrettably Einstein conceived of the photon as a point particle containing all of its
energy like a spinning billiard ball, similar to the then recently discovered electron. This
single supposition alone is responsible for all the conceptual troubles that have plagued
(QM) ever since. Now de-Broglie and Schrödinger had a wave-particle duality to deal
with when trying to explain how a particle of mass m can have a wave-like frequency: a
wave of what? Born’s introduction of the probability function, avoided the necessity of
finding a physically realistic answer to all these new questions. A ‘particle’ such as the
photon was assumed to have a probability of being anywhere until it was detected,
when it ‘collapsed’ in one position only. Quantum weirdness was born.
The Compton Effect[66] has been widely interpreted as experimental proof

that the photon can act like a particle. Recent work however shows that a wave
interpretation is equally valid [95]. In (BU) the reason for the particle-wave duality
becomes clear: The photon starts out with the ordered release of energy from all the
nodes making up electrons surrounding the nucleus, creating a pattern of energy
transfer that has both forward and radial momentum. It spreads thereafter from node
to node as an electromagnetic wave-like pattern. The photon is always a wave pattern
made up of particle-like nodes. There is no need to puzzle over an elusive duality that
shows up according to how the photon is observed.
2.7 (BU) EXPLAINS QUANTUM PROBABILITY AND THE UNCERTAINTY

RELATIONS
Tamari[22], [67] has shown that a classical dipole’s far- field spreads as a
bow-wave that contains both forward and radial momentum from which the basic
elements of QM and GR can be derived directly and simply (FIG.28).
FIG. 28 The static and time- harmonic Electric field component parallel to the
dipole’s z axis on any line -AA normal to that axis follows the form of a
Gaussian probability distribution, providing a physical interpretation of the
quantum probability wave function. The value for j was chosen to fit the
probability curve to Ez of the field of a simple dipole, for z=B=100.
HOME
PHYSICS
& MATHS
BEATIFUL
UNIVERSE
SECTIONS:
1
1.6
2
2.9
The components of the electric field of any cross-section of the dipole field normal to
the dipole axis closely resemble a normal distribution, i.e. a probability function.
Another way to see how the pattern of node interactions can be studied probabilistically
based on an FCC lattice is shown in (FIG. 29 a.) Each node transfers its energy to the
13 immediately adjacent nodes in the FCC lattice. Had each node interacted with only
two nodes, a binomial probability distribution would have resulted (FIG. 29 b.) With 13
nodes in each branch of the tree the normal distribution is reached rapidly as the
energy spreads in the lattice.
FIG. 29 Diffusion of energy between nodes creates a normal distribution

resembling probability. (a) In an actual 3 Dimensional FCC lattice momentum
arriving at a given node A is transferred to nine neighboring nodes. (b) In a 2-
D lattice the energy from A is transferred as a binomial distribution, so that
the energy levels of the top row of nodes lie on a probabilistic normal curve P.
Heisenberg used diffraction blurring the image in a microscope as an example of

his uncertainty relations.10 In Tamari’s united dipole paper22 the uncertainty relations,
for example between momentum direction and position, emerge from this physical
dipole model simply and naturally: the photon wave starts out from a single node but
can diffract in all directions (albeit at discrete angles which get finer as the wave
spreads far in the network). Far away from the source, the photon is now a wave of
energy spread over a wide area, but with the node orientation concentrated mostly in
the forward direction (FIG. 30).
HOME
PHYSICS
& MATHS
BEATIFUL
UNIVERSE
SECTIONS:
1
1.6
2
2.9
FIG. 30. Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Relations are a direct consequence of the

geometry of a diffracting, i.e. an expanding dipole wave. The momentum
range is indirectly proportional to the width of the wave x
measured either along a streamline S or an equipotential surface of the
field. A (BU) node rotating through pi in one second, by definition, is half a
unit
of
action (h).
This model adapts itself easily in (BU), but instead of a single dipole with a
classical wave spreading in vacuum, the bow wave radiates via a field of other dipoles.
It now becomes possible to think that the wave function solutions of

Schrödinger’s equation 9describe the angular momentum pattern of nodes oscillating in
a standing-wave pattern. This is something that has yet to be proved rigorously, but is
made plausible because this wave equation contains the constant (h), which in (BU) is
the unit of angular momentum for each node. On the other hand, the infinite number of
plane-wave Fourier components making up Heisenberg’s matrices[68] now has a
physical explanation from the lattice geometry of (BU): Considering the lattice packing
as a crystal, a straight lines radiating from a node A to B can have a plane orthogonal to
it containing a number of nodes. The orientation of each of these planes can be adapted
from its Miller index, a convention used to define facet angles in crystals[69]. The
infinity of such lines that can radiate from A, each at a unique orientation constitutes
the plane wave components of the matrix (FIG. 31).
FIG. 31. Heisenberg’s

matrices have been
interpreted as the infinite
plane waves of the Fourier
components of a wave. A 2D
(a) and 3D (b), (c)
interpretation of this
concept in (BU) theory. The
planes are considered as
crystal-like facets, i.e.
planes intercepting the
lattice at different angles .
These planes are defined by
their Miller indices which
are the intercepts of the plane on the x, y, and z coordinates .
2.8 QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT IS LOCAL AND CAUSAL IN (BU)
In (BU) the photon is a wave-like pattern of energy states within the fixed nodes of the
lattice, and not a point particle, making it unnecessary to use imaginary ‘probability
waves’. Of course there are genuinely random physical processes in nature, for
example in the timing, phase or polarization involved in the emission and absorption of
incoherent photons. These are the end result of complex and chaotic interactions which
are in themselves linear, local and causal.
In (BU) a causal, local and physically realistic explanation of quantum effects banishes
the whole range of conceptual mysteries, weirdness or magic that have plagued (QM)
g p y , g p g (Q )
for most of the past century. From the point of view of (BU) theory, Einstein and his
colleagues posed the wrong challenge to (QM) in their ‘EPR Paradox’ paper[70]: The
authors questioned how mutually random spins of the entangled pair of electrons
arriving at distant locations, can have any correlation between them outside the light
cone allowed by (SR), assuming that only local interactions are possible. Bell’s
Theorem[71] and Clauser’s experiments[72], using photon polarization as a variable,
successfully challenged this view: there is a correlation although there were no signals
HOME exchanged between the distant photons prior to or after their alleged ‘collapse’ when
PHYSICS they were sensed. What should have been questioned in the EPR paper instead was the
& MATHS (QM) notion that an electron’s spin (or a photon’s polarization) direction is inherently
random in all possible circumstances.
BEATIFUL
UNIVERSE In (BU) all of these suppositions reduce to this simple scenario: the two photons
SECTIONS: emitted by the same atom start out in opposite directions having identical polarization,
1 which is retained intact when they arrive at the sensors at their respective distant
1.6 locations. They are entangled because they are identical from start to finish. Their
2 polarization states are faithfully transmitted from node to node across the network, and
when the sensor data is compared, of course their polarization states are highly
2.9 correlated. There is no need to conjure either ‘spooky’ instantaneous action-at-a-
distance[73] or hidden variables[74] to explain what is happening. All the interactions
are causal and local, as is everything else in (BU). There is no need to appeal to
scenarios involving backwards travel in time[75], multiple universes[76], or mental
processes in the mind of the observer[77] to explain why the photon ‘chooses’ one path
or the other.
Something quite similar is involved when trying to explain the double-slit interference
experiments. Again, the photons and particles involved are not imbued with a
supernatural sense that can tell if the other photon or particle has passed through a
particular slit or not. In (BU) either one of two scenarios applies: In the case of
radiation, the wave always passes through both slits at once and different parts of the
wave front interfere with each other, just as in a water-ripple experiment. This explains
how faint-light single-photons produce this interference effect[78], although in the
sensing screen individual atoms with random states accumulate the radiation randomly
until a quanta is absorbed, giving the impression of point-like photons arriving there to
make up the pattern. Dirac’s maxim that ‘a photon interferes only with itself’[79] has a
clear physical explanation in the context of (BU).
Double-slit interference experiments involving particles such as electrons or protons

require another explanation: the particle has an electrostatic or gravitational field, it is
speculated that in (BU) the particle passes through one slit, while it’s accompanying
gravitational or electrostatic waves pass through the other slit. The particle arrives at
the sensor and interferes with its own field arriving there at the same time (FIG. 32).
FIG 32. Double-slit

interference for radiation
and particles in (BU). (a) A
plane wave-front
approaches the screen and
passes simultaneously from
the two slits, interfering at
the sensor at the top. (b) A
particle passes through the
slit to the right while its own
gravitational waves diffracts
through the other slit. The
particle and its own gravity
interfere at the sensor.
Previous Top Next

REFERENCES FOR THIS SECTION
[20] Witten, E. Quantum Field Theory and the Jones Polynomial. In

Communications in Math. Physics. 121,No.3 pp.351-399 (1989).
[22] Tamari, V. United Dipole Field (unpublished paper,1993) published in

ArXiv 2002 http://jp.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0303082
[38]Drezet, A.The physical origin of the Fresnel drag of light by a moving

dielectric medium,
http://tw.arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0506/0506004.pdf
[39] La Frenier, G. http://www.glafreniere.com/matter.htm
[40] Miller indices are explained at:

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/chemistry/MillerIndex.html
10/23/22, 8:41 AM Beautiful Universe Part 2.9
BEAUTIFUL UNIVERSE
2.9 WEAK GRAVITATIONAL, BUT STRONG ELECTROSTATIC FORCES
The equations describing the gravitational force and the electrostatic force are very
similar. In both cases the force between two particles is proportional to the product of
HOME their masses or charges, and inversely proportional to the product of their distance,
PHYSICS multiplied by a constant. However the Gravitational constant G is many orders of
& MATHS magnitude smaller than Coulomb's constant (k). (BU) offers an explanation for this: If
the masses and charges involved are thought of as spheres, the nodes making up the
BEATIFUL gravitational field surrounding an uncharged mass will have their axes tangential to its
UNIVERSE surface. They will be normal to radial lines extended from the center of mass and the
SECTIONS: surrounding nodes in the field will experience mutual repulsion as discussed earlier. This
1 would be true whether the nodes rotate in place or not. In the case of a charged
1.6 particle (or permanent magnet) the nodes orient themselves along the radial lines so
2 that the surface of the sphere will only have like charges (+ or -) on it. This will cause
2.9 the nodes of the surrounding field to align themselves radially, strongly locked (+ with
-) end to end, along the so-called lines of force making up the field. (FIG.33).
Another explanation for the low value of G known today might is that relatively massive
macroscopic systems are now typically used to measure G. A single node is
immediately surrounded by just 12 other nodes in an FCC lattice. Currently a spherically
homogeneous mass is assumed in deducing G from the measured gravitational forces
between two spheres. The geometrical differences between the two models should be
studied to calculate, measure or deduce the true value of G on the scale of two adjacent
nodes.
Revising the value of G of would increase the value of the smallest distance assumed in
nature, the Planck Length, 4.05096x10-35 m. which must equal do the distance
between nodes in the lattice. This of course does not imply that do equals the present
value of the Planck length.
FIG. 33. The weakness of

the gravitational field
compared to the
electrostatic one. (a) A
charged particle’s surface
nodes are oriented
normally to its surface.
The adjacent nodes’ axes
align themselves along
the streamlines as lines of
force, because of strong
(+-) attraction. (b) An
uncharged particle’s surface nodes are parallel to the surface and there is no
strong polarity, so the field nodes’ axes are normal to the streamlines
interacting weakly.
2.10 THE STANDARD MODEL
If (BU) is indeed a true model of how nature operates, various results of the Standard
Model[80] would then emerge from it. Not all the results may do so, for some may
prove spurious. For example the many symmetries possible in a regular FCC lattice can
be compared to the concept of symmetry in the Standard Model. Symmetry-breaking
would be explained because all the nodes in the (BU) universe have handedness,
spinning in the same sense. It is beyond scope of this paper to go beyond the following
further suggestions:
Particles of matter in (BU) are constructed of various polyhedral arrangements

of locked nodes, as suggested in section 1.6. This concept was examined in detail by
Fuller[81], and is demonstrated by Cook’s model of the nucleus33,34. In general free
electrons and subatomic particles would be clusters of nodes in various polyhedral
arrangements, each node either spinning in place, or also rotating in unison with all the
other nodes. This in turn suggests that the so-called force-carrying particles of the
Standard Model are imaginary entities related to the geometry of the field in the volume
of nodes between the surfaces of two congruent particles. (FIG. 34). The placement and
orientation of the nodes on the two particles’ opposite surfaces will affect those in the
volume between them.
FIG. 34 The concept of force-carrying particles between two particles A and B

in close proximity. The states of the nodes on the surfaces of the particles
facing each other and the geometry of the intermediate volume C define the
interaction between A and B. In that sense C is a force-carrying ‘particle’.
HOME
PHYSICS
& MATHS
BEATIFUL
UNIVERSE
SECTIONS:
1 In Internet physics chats the square root of the fine structure constant alpha
1.6 was related by ‘FrediFizzx’ to the geometry of an electron surrounded a cubical
2
arrangement of virtual particles[82], closely resembling the situations in a cubic (BU)
2.9 lattice. Another researcher ‘FrankH’ relates the polarizability of matter to the
Electrostatic gradient and to the gravitational force[83]. This is similar to the (BU)
concept that gravity is ascribed to the twisting (i.e. polarization) of the node axes in a
field surrounding matter. Finally, is antimatter made up of matter with the nodes
spinning in the opposite sense, or merely structured with each 'normal' node rotated in
place by (π)? Would the two cases be equivelent?
2.11 COSMOLOGICAL QUESTIONS
As described in section 1.3 and (FIG. 1), according to (BU) the expansion of the
universe is due to local repulsion between the nodes making up space, and not to an
initial explosion of a Big Bang point where and when space and time began. Assuming
that the nodes of (BU) have some sort of substance, they must have initially been
compressed together into a minimum sphere (but not a point) by some surrounding
force and suddenly released. This raises the question of whether the entire (BU) exists
within further dimensions that we cannot detect. In either case the electrostatic
repulsion between the nodes would be the cause of a cosmic inflation ‘explosion’, and
would agree with astronomical observations of an expanding universe (FIG 35).
FIG. 35 Big Bang theory

states that spacetime
started expanding from a
point followed later by a
period of unexplained
sudden inflation. (BU)
theory states that the
universe started from ether
nodes compacted together,
but not to a point, then
immediately started
inflating due to mutual
node repulsion. The node
geometry defines space and
node-to-node
This (BU) scenario implies that do increased from some minimum value but not zero at
the time of Inflation. This in turn would affect the value of co. In other words the speed
of light in vacuum was some maximum at Inflation and decreased uniformly as do
increased, until it reached the locally measured value today. Since the speed of light
would then be slowing down all over the universe proportionate to its rate of expansion,
our basic concepts of astronomical distances and time-scales must be re-examined
accordingly.
As a result of linking the concept of time to that of the distance do in (BU), a curious
conclusion can be reached: As the universe expands, and since the nodes repulse each
other, geometrical relationships between the nodes expand accordingly. Unlike in the
Big Bang theory[84] where space expands with no center, the expansion of the
universe in (BU) has a center. If this is true the radial distances between adjacent nodes
expand less than their tangential distances. The difference is indirectly proportional to
the radial distance from the center of the universe, so it is very slight. All interactions
must then slow down by that amount in tangential directions. (FIG. 36)
FIG. 36. Does the Beautiful Universe have a center (0) and the nodes expand
inhomogeneously? If so, then the node-to-node rate of expansion along
tangential ‘distances’ will be slightly larger (depending on the radial distance r
)when measured tangentially than when measured radially: While ac=bd ,
ab<cd. This effect may only be measurable on astronomical scales.
HOME
PHYSICS
& MATHS
BEATIFUL
UNIVERSE
SECTIONS:
1
1.6
2 The dark matter[85] pervading the universe and keeping galaxies from disintegrating
while they rotate, will have a simple explanation in (BU): dark matter is simply the
2.9 nodes of the vacuum which surrounds all matter from atoms to galaxies. Their
combined and uniform repulsion would be experienced as a pressure directed at the
surface of all matter (FIG. 37). This same repulsion explains the 'Dark Energy' [94]
now conjured up to explain the discovery that the expansion of the universe is
accelarating.
FIG. 37 ‘Dark Matter’ and 'Dark

Energy' are different outcomes of
the same phenomena: the mutual
repulsion of charged spinning ether
nodes of the lattice. This repulsion
acts as a 'force' on matter it
surrounds. It also accounts for of
the accelaration of the expansion
of the Universe.
The Bekenstein-Hawking result that the entropy of a black hole is directly proportional
to the area of its event horizon[93] somehow resembles the (BU) notion that mass can
be equated to the momentum contained in a surrounding spherical shell, as in Fig. 11
and the discussion in Sec. 1.6.
3. EXPERIMENTAL TESTS OF (BU)

Various aspects of the theory may be testable. Some possible approaches are:
3.1 THE EVIDENCE OF DIFFRACTION AND DE-DIFFRACTION
The fundamental reason radiation fields diffract is easily explained in the (BU) model:
nodes transfer energy to many nodes around them, so that the wavefront behaves as if
it is made up of Huygens wavelets[86] centered on each node. According to Tamari’s
Streamline Diffraction Theory[87] and based on the wave equation for continuous fields
(i.e. not as in the discrete space of (BU)), the diffraction of a radiation field could be
prevented, i.e. de-diffracted (DD). If the initial conditions mimic those of a time-
reversed diffracted wave, a (DD) wave will be produced. DD may occur only if the
vacuum had no role to play in the diffraction process, otherwise the granularity of space
will prevent it. An experimental failure of DD can be taken as a proof of (BU) theory, as
detailed in (FIG. 38). So far, the only experimental result using light indicated a failure
of DD[88], but more refined experiments will be needed to reach a definite conclusion
(FIG. 38). Similarly, simulations have shown that time-reversal of a quantum system is
possible[89]. If this is confirmed experimentally it would falsify (BU) node-to-node
interactions as assumed in this paper.
FIG. 38 Diffraction of waves in vacuum is shown in the left half of the in the
figure in cases of continuous classical fields (a) or in a volume of discrete
(BU) nodes (b): Wave (0) leaves an aperture travels to the left, diffracting
into wavefronts D1, D2, DD… De-diffraction theory states that the reversed
wave, (DD traveling to the right) will continue without diffracting as the upper
portions of waves 0, 1, 2… In the (BU) field (b), wavefront (DD) will diffract
again after (0), because the momentum is spread out from each node in
wavelets from each node (small arrows).
HOME
PHYSICS
& MATHS
BEATIFUL
UNIVERSE
SECTIONS:
1
1.6
2
2.9 3.2 A VACUUM DIFFRACTION GRATING AND EVIDENCE OF A
DODECAHEDRAL COSMOLOGICAL STRUCTURE?
An electromagnetic beam formed within an optical cavity in vacuum will have its nodes
energized in a fixed pattern of maxima and minima. This can be used as an immaterial
diffraction grating to scatter another wave crossing the optical axis of the first beam
normally (FIG. 39).
FIG. 39. Light shined

from L through a region
of vacuum containing a
standing optical wave D.
The standing wave will
act as a diffraction
grating, demonstrating
the reality of the nodes.
Similarly, the vacuum lattice structure might be the explanation for the recent
observation that the microwave background temperature distribution suggests a
dodecahedral ‘shape’ for the universe. [90]It is more probable that the micro structure
of the FCC lattice geometry of the nodes, within which a dodecahedron can be outlined,
is the physical cause for this result.
3.3 TIME-RESOLVED HEAVISIDE CONTRACTION?
In Section 2.4 and (FIG. 26) it was shown how a force impinging on stationary matter
will compress each atom into an ellipsoid, shortening the overall length accomplishing
the Heaviside contraction (Eq. 16) before the object actually starts to move at the
velocity v. If a force is applied a very short time on the short end of a very long dense
rod, it will be possible to actually measure this contraction before the rod starts to
move.
3.4 GRAVITATIONAL / ELECTROSTATIC FIELD ANOMALY ON A SPHERE?
[91] which implies that any continuous vector field tangent on a sphere must have a
point where the vector is zero. In other words combing a hairy ball always leaves a
point uncombed. The gravitational, field surrounding a spherical particle will have a
vortex on the surface where the gravitational and electrostatic fields will be null.
Buckminsterfullerene31, 32 C60 molecules may be ideal candidates to test this idea with,
since they are spherical and are small enough that a gravitational anomaly would be
prominent (FIG. 40).
FIG. 40. Brouwer’s theorem in topology states that a field of vectors on the
surface of a sphere always has one vortex. The gravitational field of a particle
will have a spot where its gravity is zero. Nodes oriented with their axes
tangential to a sphere’s surface will include a group whose axes rotate 360◦
relative to each other canceling any forces there (X). This in turn will create a
null field along a cone whose axis is extended from the center of the sphere
through X and into space.
HOME
PHYSICS
& MATHS
BEATIFUL
UNIVERSE
SECTIONS:
1
1.6
2
3.5 COSMIC TIME DILATION AND VARIATIONS IN SPEED OF LIGHT?
2.9
As explained in section 2.11 and (FIG.36), if the (BU) expansion started from an
explosive inflation with a center, then the speed of light, and hence the measurement of
time, will be faster measured radially than tangentially. The effect is proportional to the
radial distance from the center. Is this effect detectable in astronomical measurements?
More critically, the measured speed of light cm may also depend on the node-
to-node distances of the local lattice. As described in Section 2.7, and seen in (FIG.
29a.) this distance can vary by a factor of FL for a square lattice depending on
the direction angle of propagation within the lattice.
(22) co=cmFL
This also depends on which lattice packing actually exists in nature. Experiments can
be devised similar to Michelson and Morley’s but with the interferometer arms at various
angles not just ninety degrees to each other.
4. CONCLUSION
A new physically realistic universal ‘building block’, a spherically symmetrical charged

node, has been proposed to re-construct physics with, and various known phenomena
were examined from the few simple rules of how it behaves. The model explains some
of the known results of Special and General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and the
Standard Model, but without their assumptions, such as a point photon, flexible
spacetime, the constancy of the speed of light, or the reality of probability functions.
A universal self-assembled regular lattice of nodes creates space; and their comparative
rate of transfer of angular momentum to adjacent nodes is used to describe time. While
the nodes themselves do not move within the lattice, radiation is a spreading ‘falling
domino’ pattern of such momentum transfer between the nodes. Motion of matter is a
self-convolution of a pattern of nodes locked by mutual coulomb forces in a (+-)
tensegrity structure created by the balanced attractive and repulsive forces between
adjacent magnetic nodes. Node spin regulates signal transfer velocity, therefore node
energy can be regarded as proportional to a local index refraction of the universal
medium. The Hamiltonian Analogy is then used to describe energy transport across the
lattice. Various aspects of 20th Century physics and cosmology are explained from the
Beautiful Universe (BU) model and various experimental tests of the theory are
proposed. The treatment is elementary and qualitative, and suggestions for improving
the model, proving or disproving it are welcome.
5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Online research for this paper made it possible to read the ideas of scores of physicists
dissatisfied with the state of physics today. There was much that I could not understand
or that I did not agree with, but the current ferment was always stimulating. Thanks are
due to the online physics community aiming to reconstruct physics on a new basis.
Some papers needed more study but I lost their reference, such as a highly
mathematical paper by a Korean physicist who described a unified theory based on
dipoles. I thank Gabriel LaFreniere[57] for interesting correspondence and for his
beautiful and instructive simulations of Lorentz contractions and Doppler shifts in matter
waves. Norman Cook[33] kindly sent me the amazing NVS software he developed for
simulating nuclear structures, a concept that compliments my ideas for physics in a
regular universal lattice. I thank him for his encouragement and for proofreading the
text. Rev. Dr. John Polkinghorne [92] warned me that an attempt to combine quantum
theory and gravity is “extremely difficult and has resisted the efforts of very great
experts”. I did not heed this wise and kind advice, and foolishly but happily spent many
years of difficult research, often in areas way beyond my capacity, as can be readily
seen in this paper. Dr. Dennis de Lang’s computer assistance was invaluable in the
preparation of this paper. His studious example and encouragement, and those of Dr.

Beautiful Universe Section 1.merged

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Beautiful Universe Section 1.merged

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

10/23/22, 8:20 AM Beautiful Universe Section 1

BEATIFUL 4-2-8-C26 Komazawa, Setagaya-ku, Tokyo Japan 154-0012

A proposal to reconstruct physics from simple physically realistic first principles

1. THE BEAUTIFUL UNIVERSE (BU)

Nature is now complex, but is believed to have evolved systematically over

It is no wonder then that present-day physics is a hodge-podge of complicated

Such confusion is possible because vastly different mathematical models to

1.2 A NEW START

1.3 A NETWORK OF CHARGED NODES CREATES SPACE AND TIME

It is hypothesized that the entire universe is made up of an ordered lattice of

This cosmic angular momentum is acquired by individual nodes, and can be

FIG. 1. An imagined scenario for

define the possible ‘quantum spin’ states of the particle.

Everything in (BU), space, energy, radiation, matter is just patterns of nodes

1.4 RADIATION IN VACUUM

Coulomb-like repulsion and attraction between the spinning magnetized nodes

FIG. 4 Self-assembly of magnetic dipole nodes oriented in the same direction

Electromagnetic waves are created when an arrangement of matter loses

(2) sv= j so =jh (j=1,2,3…)­

creating a magnetic effect and capable of forward momentum. In a process similar to

FIG. 5 Forward momentum

FIG. 6. Two modes contributing their

to-node orientation is constant. Streamlines (S) are normal to ( ). (d)

FIG. 8. Nodes transferring their spin and forward momentum as part of an

1.5 VELOCITY OF INTERACTION, SPACE AND TIME

There is no time dimension presupposed in (BU) theory, only successive

FIG. 9 radiation travels at a maximum speed of c0 in a vacuum free of matter,

Assuming that the relationship between the velocity of transfer depends

where M is a geometrical inclination factor depending on the direction in the lattice

(5) do=j Mdo (j= 1,2,3…)

A local index of refraction of space n or its inverse can now be defined:

Angular momentum spreads as energy in the lattice as light would in a

While radiation is a dynamic spreading group pattern of momentum passed from

A hypothetical ‘explosion’ of two-node matter in a vacuum lattice is imagined. At

(7) MH=2π an bhc02

(Eqs. 8 and 9) define an attribute (m) of matter in units of angular momentum

FIG. 12. A basic floating

From http://www.kennethsnelson.net/icons/atom.htm )[29]

Buckminsterfullerene[31],[32] was synthesized and found to follow the same

FIG. 14 A drawing made in 1948 FIG 15 Schematic diagram of a

BEATIFUL Using an alternative formulation of (QM), Cook[33], [34] has

FIG. 17. Two nodes forming the

(10) grav= G0 (∑ angular momentum of all the nodes locked in matter) /

Which is Newton’s famous result[36] interpreted in terms of (BU) where the

1.8 DYNAMICS: FORCE, INERTIAL MASS, AND MOTION

In (BU) a particle of matter is a pattern of nodes locked in place in different

FIG. 20. Motion of a particle involves a process of self-convolution of its

To summarize this process: matter absorbs new forward momentum as a force

Another way to visualize convoluted motion is through the concept of Fresnel

Where( fresnel involves the same variables as

1.9 SUMMARY OF THE (BU) ASSUMPTIONS

Previous Top Next

[29] Kenneth Snelson Kenneth Snelson Exhibition: The Nature of Structure

The New York Academy of Sciences, January - April 1989 online at

[31] Nature 347, 354-358 (27 Sep 1990)

[32] Kroto, H. Symmetry, Space, Stars and C . Noble Prize in Chemistry

[33] Cook, N.D. &. Dallacasa, V. Face-centered solid-phase theory of the

Cook, N.D Nuclear Visualization Software in:

Cook, N. & Musulmanbekov, G. Nuclear Structure Theory Reconstructed Using a Quark

Independent- Particle Model Features:

2.2 A DISCRETE CALCULUS FOR (BU)

The reductionist nature of BU demands matching mathematical methods. Newton

Rather, in (BU) a field or action is described by a summation of discrete intervals or

(2) sv= j so =jh (j=1,2,3…)